The many modes of meta
The many modes of meta
复制标题
DOI：
10.1177/009286150003400222
复制
发表时间：
2000-04-01
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Senn, S
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Senn, S
通常对荟萃分析的使用可能存在的许多保留意见（例如，关于发表偏倚）并不适用于药物开发的特定背景。事实上，荟萃分析是总结药物开发计划结果的一种非常自然且适当的方式，正如国际协调会议 (ICH) E9 指南所认可的那样。由于申办者可以访问所有原始数据，因此药物开发计划中的一组临床试验的数据与单个多中心试验中的一组中心的数据具有非常相似的（分层）结构。然而，奇怪的是；分析多中心试验的争议通常与荟萃分析领域的争议不同。本文检查了药物开发中荟萃分析师可以选择的选项，并与分析多中心试验所使用的方法进行了比较，试图提供一些统一的见解，特别是在交互模型的处理方面。
Many of the reservations that might attach to the use of meta-analysis generally (for example, regarding publication bias) do not apply in the specific context of drug development. A,meta-analysis is, in fact, a highly natural and appropriate way to summarize the results of a drug development program, as has been recognized in the International Conference on Harmonization (ICH) E9 guideline. Since a sponsor will have access to all original data, the data from a set of clinical trials in a drug development program hare a very similar (hierarchical) structure to the data from a set of centers in a single multicenter trial. Curiously, however; the controversies over analyzing multicenter trials have often been different from those in the field of meta-analysis. In this paper the options open to the meta-analyst in drug development are examined and comparisons to approaches used in analyzing multicenter trials are made in an attempt to provide some unifying insights, in particular as regards the handling of models with interactions.